Patna High Court
CR. MISC./53721/2026 of Umang Mishra @ Umang Kumar Mishra Vs The State of Bihar on 17 August 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53721 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-295 Year-2026 Thana- GOPALGANJ TOWN District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Umang Mishra @ Umang Kumar Mishra Son of Late Devendra Mishra R/O Vill- Basdila, P.S.-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53721 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-295 Year-2026 Thana- GOPALGANJ TOWN District- Gopalganj ======================================================
Umang Mishra @ Umang Kumar Mishra Son of Late Devendra Mishra R/O
Vill- Basdila, P.S.- Gopalganj Town, Distt.- Gopalganj, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr. Sumit Shekhar Pandey, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Md. Shakir Ahmad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
17-08-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 111 of the BNS and Sections 25(1-B)a and 26 of the Arms Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that based on secret information, the room of Kirtiman was raided on 18.03.2026 at 1:35 AM and from the room, a country-made loaded pistol was recovered, the arm was unloaded and eight cartridges were recovered and Kirtiman disclosed that arm has been given by Umang (petitioner), next alleges that he further disclosed that money was spent in seeking Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53721 of 2026(2) dt.17-08-2026
bail in a murder case, hence to compensate the amount, the accused persons were planning to commit loot along with Sumit, Aryan and petitioner, thereafter house of Sumit was raided where Aryan was also present and from their mobile was recovered and Sumit disclosed that earlier he was arrested in a liquor case and they indulged in liquor business.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case based on confessional statement of Kirtiman. It is next submitted that confessional statement in police custody does not have any evidentiary value. It is also reiterated and submitted that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent. It is next submitted that Kirtiman in his confessional statement has stated that the arms were given to him by the petitioner, but then during the course of investigation nothing transpired connecting the petitioner with the offence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner and submits that no doubt name of the petitioner transpired in the confessional statement of Kirtiman in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value, but then the apprehended accused in his confessional statement had disclosed that the arms were given Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53721 of 2026(2) dt.17-08-2026
by the petitioner, as such, the statement of the apprehended accused requires to be corroborated based on investigation for which interrogation of the petitioner is required. It is next submitted that if petitioner is innocent, the police will submit final form exonerating him of the allegation. It is also submitted that investigation in the case is continuing.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the application stands rejected.
rajesh/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T